The Sun. — London, England, 1838-02-06 00:00:00

'RIVATE BUSINESS OF PARLIA- MENT.-(YESTERDAY.) COMMITTEE ON BILLS. OGLRY HAY (STAFFORD) INCLOSURB BILL. Mr. Firscn, M. P., in the Chair. Colonel Anson Mr. Thorneley Mr. Buller ( Stafford) Mr. Villiers Mr. Grimsditch Mr. Williams. A very important point was mooted by this Committee. The new Special Standing Orders require " That in all Bills for inclosing Common or Waste Lands provision be made for leaving an open space, suffic'ent for purposes of exercise and recreation of the neighbouring population, and that in any case when provision is not made in the Bill, the Committee on the same be required specially to report to the House the rea sons for not complying with such Order." In this case it appeared that no such vacant space had b' een reserved, and the Committee evinced a praisevvo;t‘r:y anxiety not only to learn th e reason w h y, b ut also to protect the in terests of the poor generally. Evidence was adduced to show that this intended inclosurc was surrounded by trs':;t3 of waste and forest land, and that the population was very small—the witness declaring- that not more than 50 - ,.;ersons dwelt within two miles all round it. On this the Committee came to the following resolution, " That it hppeared to the Committee that the lands proposed to be enclosed were not contiguous to any town or village, and that they were in the immediate vicinity of other large tracts of write land, and therefore, that there existed no necessity for Alloting any space for the recreation of the poor." Mr. Williams, M. P., for Coventry, strictly cross-examined the witnesses whether there were not poor people who had bui!t upon the waste, and would be turned out by this Act. The witness declared there were none, the Lord of the Maxim' having been very strict in its preservation. The Committee, after the usual evidence, then declared the preamble proved, and proceeded to consider the proposed 9.',• terations in the clauses of the Bill—one r which was that persons whose interests would be affected,'„,y should be com pelled to de c l are w i t hi n 21 days, w /- ...etbet. they would take the price awarded or not. This Committee altered to one month, and then proceeded 03 pros the Bill, which will be re ported to the House. IMPF•RIAL PARLIAMENT. KO USE OF COMMONS, FEB. 5. The Sr. , Alma took the Chair at Four o'Clock. Lord. A. CoNysonAm took the oaths and his seat as Merrier for Canterbury. The Sheriffs of London and Middlesex appeared at tl'e bar, and presented two petitions from the Lord Mayor, Al dermen, and Common Councilmen of the City of London, but the nature of them we are unable to state, as it was not mentioned by the Sheriffs at the bar, nor by the Clerk at the table. Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition from Barnsley in Yorkshire against the Small Debts Court Bill. POST OFrICE IMPROVEMENT. Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from the Cham ber of Commerce of the City of Edinburgh, in favour of Mr. Rowland Hill's plan for Post Office Improvement, but, as Wq understood, deprecating the experiment proposed to be made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The HoN. MEMBER presented also a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Edinburgh, praying for an ex tension of the Day Mails to Edinburgh. DAY MAILS. Mr. GRANTLEY BERKLEY presented a petition from a parish in Gloucestershire, praying fur a repeal of the Poor-law Amendment L.N. ;t , Mr. STEWART presented a petition (whence we did not hear) against thca Poor-law Bill for Ireland. Sir W. SON.IERVILLE presented a petition from the Merchants, Traders, and other inhabitants of the town of Drogheda, praying for a reduction on the postage o f letters, Lord ALBERT CONYNGHAM presentcd a peti tion from the electors of Canterbury, praying for the pro tection of the Vote by Ballot, the Extension of the Suf frage, and Short Parliaments. ABOLITION OF NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP. Mr. PEASE presented petitions from Darlington, Frome, and another place, the name bi which we could not catch, praying for the abolitio':, of the system of Negro Apprenticeship, The HON. MEMBER presented another petition from Darlington, praying for a, reduction of the duties upon Olive Oil. PATENTS. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from Mr. Parkir4, a manufacturer of the City of London, complain ing that a new invention of his had been pirated by the Croydo n Railway Company. The petitioner stated that he had applied for an injunction to the Vice-Chancellor, but it been refused on the ground that only a partial use had been made of the article. The object of this petition was merely to show the defective state of the law as re garded Patents, to which the petitioner hoped the atten tion of the House would be directed. NEGRO SLA_VERY. Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a petition from Boroughbridge, ill the North Riding of Yorkshire, complaining that, although 20 millions had been paid by the country t(1 'procure the emancipation of the negroes, the evils of slavery remained unabated. The petitioners prayed frJr the abolition of the system of apprenticeship, under which they considered the condition of the negroes as )'.ttle better than it had formerly been. The HON. BARONET presented another petition from Dent, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, to the same effect. Mr. A. W HITE presented a petition to the same effect, but from what place we could not learn. NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP. Mr. FINCH presented a petition from some place, the name of which we could not catch, against the system of Negro Apprenticeship in the Colcnies. GLASGOW COTTON-SPINNERS. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from Huddersfiehl, signed by 12,000 persons, praying for a mitigation of the sentence on the Glasgow Cotton-spinners ; also a petition from Paisley, agreed to at a public meet ing, and signed by the Chairman, praying the House to address her Majesty for a mitigation or commu tation of the sentence ; also a Petition to the same effect from the Carpenters' Trades Union, at the Ivy House, Doswell -street-ro a d ; and one from the inhabitants of Shoreditch and Spitalfichls. The Hon. Hember then presented one from the Glasgow Cotton-spinners them selves, signed by 990 persons, and praying that, in conse quence of the statements which had been made against the Association in the public press, the House would appoint a Committee to inquire into the constitution of that Asso ciation, and into a!! its practices. The Petitioners stated that they did not dread inquiry, and prayed the House to make the investigation as searching as possible. The Hon. Member presented another petition on the same subject from the Carpenters and Joiners' Society in Lon don. The petitioners also entreated the House to grant t.n inquiry into the constitution of Trade Societies ge nerally, believing those Societies to be of use not only to the working classes, but to society in general. NEGRO EMANCIPATION. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from a place in the West Riding of the county of York, praying for the abolition of the system of negro apprenticeship. NATIONAL EDUCATION. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from another place in the West Riding of the county of York, complaining cf the present system of national education in the country as being very defective, and praying for a system of Na tional Education, particularly requestity, the House t o en tertPi.o th e Bill s b roug h t i nto the House of Lords by Lutd Brougham on the subject. Mr. P. M. STEWART presented petitions from places, the names of which we could not learn, praying for protection in the exercise of the elective franchise, and complaining of the exercise of fictitious votes. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from the Rector of Darlaston, against the suppression of the Bishopric of Sodor and Man. Lord S A.N D 0 N presented two petitions from Liverpool against the Bill for rating small tenements. Also a peti tion from certain inhabitants of Liverpool, praying for a more summary jurisdiction in cases of controverted elections. Mr. E. BULLER presented a petition from a place in Staffordshire, against the Negro Apprenticeship System. Also, a petition to the same effect from the Dissenting Congregation of Pope's Chapel, Pentonville. Mr. HUME presented petitions from Middlesex, Ti verton, and a parish in Suffolk, praying for the vote by ballot ; also a petition from the members of a Mechanic's Institution, praying for the establishment of a system of national education. The petitioners stated that during the late election a great deal of bribery, corruption, and demo ral.ization took place ; and they complained that they were deprived of the right to exercise their franchise, on the ground that they were ignorant, for which education would afford a sufficient remedy. The petitioners hoped that schools would be established throughout the country. NEW ZEALAND ASSOCIATION. Mr. PLUMTRE gave notice that he should on Tues day, the 13th February, move that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, prayin g th a t h er M a j esty wou ld e graciously pleased to withhold from the New Zealand Association the grant of her Royal Charter. Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition frorn the Board of Guardians of the Roehampton Union, signed by the Chairman, and unanimously agreed to, against any alterations in the principles of the Poor-law Bill. The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the parish of Culsthorpe (as we understood), in Devon, praying for the total abolition of Slavery. An H ON . MEMBER, whose name was not known, pre sented a petition in favour of the Vote by Ballot, an ex tension of the Suffrage, and the shortening of the duration of Parliaments. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gale notice that he should to-morrow move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to Clerical Members o Joint Stock Companies. This he did in consequence of the decision which had lately taken place in the Court of Ex chequer.—(Hear, hear, from the Conservative Benches.) Mr. HUME wished to ask the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whether he intended to renew the Committee, and lake any measures respecting the Bank of England. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was his intention in the course of next week tij move the ap pointment of a Committee on Joint Stock Banks. Mr. HUME asked if the Right H Gentleman tended to open the question of the conduct of this hank during the 17;3i 18 months. T i ".: T e CHANCELLOR of the EXcHEOLTER t , kid that if the Hon. Gentleman me7,"isi 'by that ipettlon to ask whether the Governmuut Intended to propose any alter.l - in the agreement which after great deliberation that House had concluded with the Bank, he begged to state it was not his intention to propose tny alteration in that agreement. At the same time he thought it was impos sible for that House to consider the state of the Banks throughout the country without also taking into coasi deration a portion of the conduct of the Bank of Eng land, so fir!as the country, circulation was concerned. Mr. HUME wished to know bow the agreement Lc• tween the Bank and the Government had been carried into effect. He had given notice last ;'car, and he now renewed the notice, that he would 'stove an inquiry int o the general proceedings of thn r)ank of England-..and, at the same time, he 'wished to k now w h a t t h e Govern ment inten. l :a; to do with the Bank of Ireland.— ( Hear.) The period was near when the charter of that corporation would expire, and he wished to know what al teration the Government intended to propose in its con stitution. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he had given notice List year, that he intended to move for a Committee up stairs, one of the first objects of which would be, to consider the state of Banking in Ireland. Mr. HUME said he had one more question to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He had understood that a Mr. Primrose was appointed to a situation in the Post office of Edinburgh, which was generally considered to be a sinecure. Now he wished to know whether it was cor rect that such an appointment had taken place. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not at that moment prepared to answer the Honourable Member's question, but he would make inquiry and give an answer when tl7e Hon. Member should think fit to re new his motion. [Mr. O'CoNNELL, during the preceding conversation, entered the House with a large roll of papers under his arm.) NEW WRIT FOR ELGIN. On the motion of Mr. E. J. STANLEY a new writ was issued for the Elgin boroughs, in room of Sir A, L. Hay, appointed Governor of Bermuda. POOR LAWS FQII IRELAND. Mr. O'CONNELL p - resented petitions from the rntinty of Cork and from city of Dublin, complaining of the present A l; .7,:isterial plan of Poor►laws for Ireland. Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a petition from a place in Staffordshire against any Union under the new Poor-law. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in answer to a question by Sir G. Sinclair, said that if the House should get through the Irish Poor-law Bill to-night, he should proceed with the Parliamentary Electors Bill. QUARTER SESSIONS. Sir E. WILMOT said that the Noble Lord had given notice of a Bill foe improving the administration of justice at Quarter Sessions. He wished tb know if the Noble Lord included the administration of the finances also. Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that he could not answer tU question at present. Sic B. WILMOT wished to ask another question. Last Session a Bill passed the House, for allowing the Chairman or Recorder of a borough to reserve to the Judges any questions of law which might arise at the Quarter Sessions ; and also a Bill for the more summary conviction of juvenile offenders, and altering a clause in the Gaol Act. He (Sir E. Wilmot) wished to know if the Noble Lord would introduce these objects in his Bill ; lr if not, whether he could move them as a rider ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL made some reply which was quite inaudible. DUTIES ON LINEN YARNS. Mr. BAINES begged to ask the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade, whether the attention of her Majesty's Government had been directed to the in creased duties charged in France upon the importation of linens and linen yarns. The question was one deeply affecting the interests of the people of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and he hoped that attention would be directed to a measure which was calculated to entail serious calamity upon that ccuntry. Mr. POULETT THOMSON as soon as he had been informed of the proposed alteration in the duties on linen and linen yarns had applied to the Foreign-office, and made the strongest possible representations against the proposed alteration. At the same time, the communications made to him had not led him to hope the decision of the French Government would be very favourable. HAND-LOOM WEAVERS. Mr. FIELDEN begged to ask the Noble Lord (John Russell) whether the Committee appointed to enquire into the condition of the hand-loom weavers were likely to sit soon ? It appeared by the statements in the public Papers that the hand-loom weavers were suffering very great distress, and it might be worthy the consideration of her Majesty's Government, whether a sum of money ought not to be voted by that House for their relief ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL said (as we understood, his Lordship speaking in so inaudible tone) that he was not aware what progress the Committee had made, or what steps they had taken with respect to the hand loom weavers. As the Honourable Member had asked him a question, he would perhaps allow him to ask him one in return. He wished to know whether the Honourable Member had given any order for the collection of mobs to interfere with the putting into operation of the Poor-law Act? Mr. FIELDEN said that he had no objection to tlnswer the Noble Lord's question. As a Member of the Poor Law Committee, he thought it his duty to send down two persons to inquire into the distress that existed in Lancashire, and the state of the labouring people there. He had givtn them written instructions, and he had no reason to believe that they had done anything inconsistent with them. I f however they had done so, and the consequence of the steps they had adopted was that disturbances had taken place, he should be as willing as any person that they should meet the reward which the course they had adopted merited. WRECK OF THE KILLARNEY STEAMER. Lord EBRINGTON begged to ask his Right Hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, whether in consequence of the late calamitous wreck of a steam-boat on the coast of Ireland, the attention of her Majesty's Government had been drawn to the framing of a legis lative measure to regulate the eqripmcnt and cargo of % es3els of that description, carrying passengers on the same principles that were before applied to the re gulation of the passage vessels, so as to secure steam-boat passengers from the terrible risks to which they were liable by the present management of such vessels. Mr. P. THOMSON said that the event to which his Noble Friend referred had been so recent that no measure could have been decided upon by the Government in r,r ference to that specific occurrence. But it must be a ques tion for the consideration of the Government whether there shou?d not be similar restrictions upon the cargoes and equipments of steamers as upon those of other vessels car rying passengers. IMPORTATION OF COCHINEAL. Mr. 0. GORE wished to ask the Right Hon. the Chanceller of th e E xc h equer w h et h er i t was t h e intention of the Government to adopt any measures in consequence of the decision of the Court of Exchequer last week on the subject of the importation of cochineal ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that it was his intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill on the subject. GLASGOW COTTON SPINNERS. Lord ASHLEY asked if the Noble Lord, the Secretary, for the Home Department, had received an autheutic copy of the evidence at the trial of the Glasgow Cotton-spinners, and if so, whether he would have any objection to lay it on the table of the House. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said no copy of the evi dence had been sent to him ; and, if there had been he should not be disposed to lay it upon the table. ACCOMMODATION OF MEMBERS IN THE HOUSE. OF LORDS. Mr. S. O'BRIEN asked if the Hon. Baronet the Member for Warwickshire (Sir E. Wilmot) had effected anything in regard to the accommodation of Members in the House of Lords.—(A laugh.) Sir EARDLEY WILMOT said he had been told by a member of the Government that a communication bad been entered into with the Upper House upon the subject. What had since been done, he (Sir E. Wilmot) could not say. _ _ COMMUTATION OF TITHES. Mr. BARRETT gave notice, that some day in March, he would call the attention of the House to the causes which olistructed the Commutation of Tithes in England and Wales, with a view to their removal. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Poor Relief (Ire land) Bill was read. Sir CHARLES STYLE then rose to address the House, but owing to the noise which prevailed he was nct distinctly heard for some time. We understood the Hon. Baronet to say, that although he considered the Bill insuf ficient for the purposes for which it was intended, and that it would entail heavy expenses without corresponding advantages, yet, notwithstanding these things, he could not reconcile it to his conscience to Withhold his support from the Bills—( Hear, hear.) Sooner than that the poor of Ireland should remain in their degraded condition, he was even preparad for a measure more kibj'et tionable in its details. The first thiiig that struck him a; objectionable in this Bill Was, that whatever might be the cost of this Measure ene.half the burden was, to he imposed upon a clas s o f i n di v id ua l s vho wO'e linage to support it, a nda who ought not le ilistice to be called upon to pay that 11 , .. 1 , value -. os. was t o b e mstle liable to the payment or one persons occu,se j e.,., s „ In d to t h e half of the Poor Rate, Noss, he thought that was too hard, when they were aware of the almost de titute state of persons who occupied a much higher station as tenants of l an d. H e was wall aware that i t would be said th a t th ose persons wOuld be relieved from the char ge w hi c h now d evo l ee d upoe them ; but that writ a payment made by them voluntarily, which was a vety d ties. tent thing from their being comisel'ed to pay under an Act Which was to be essrietl into effect by a most ettensi'Ve !nachitieres It was also different, beauste tinder this Bill the relief to the poor woilld yr. tetlrely left to the dis , ration of the Baits Law Guardians—it would remain eh!, tkiii Whether the destitute poor should have fedief or not—it remained with them to say whether they would grant relief to all, to some, or to none of the destitute poor within the respective unions. The Bill ex pressly provided that the Guardians of the respective unions should have it in their discretion to make orders fur the relief of the poor as they should thihk fit. He could not but be very apprehensive that these Poor. law guardians—that was to say, the ratepayers themselves, the individuals whose immediate interest it would be, to curtail the relief within the narrowest limits possible—that these Poor-law guardians speaking the voice of the rates payers, would take a very limited view indeed of the iiums her of parson( who ought to receive relief under the provisions of this Bilis He therefore Was disposed to think that if it were really intended that this Bill should be what it professed Oa Bill for the more effectual relief of thu destitute In Ireland—that it should grant a right to such relief to such persons as were destitute anti eneble. support themselves ; and likewise that the nature of that relief should be mile° to make it practically applicable to the extent e,'; the destitution whi c h ex i s t e d i n Irelands 140 ould endeavour to show that deflying a eight to relief and by restrietine the Mode of administering that relief, thet the Bill must prove inefficient as to its professed oh= jeet—and likewise, that this Bill weitld he by hti teaks effectual as a measure stf retnedying even h the slightest deeree the cesulee which creates the destitution in Ireland, , ant that is, tne total want of employment e hy, the peoples Why, what w as th e Bill ? It si.aa el Bill, that per haps, might be thcs' , theiins of affording relief to SO t ooo t or Pefhettis 120,000, and that altogether depended Oaks eertain powers conferred upon the Poor Law Commis sioners, and for raising a sum of money by way of poor rate for the purposes of emigration ; that was the full measure of relief which it was intended to confer upon the destitute poor of Ireland. Now if that Bill was sufficient as its framers asserted for the necessities of the case, let them for one moment consider what was the amount of destitution which existed in Ireland. In endeavouring to form an opinion on that subject, he would not revert to the amount of relief given in England, or the number who received that relief. He had been told that in mak ing a calculation upon such a basis, the results would be quite erroneous, and give an exaggerated statement of the amount of destitution in that country. He thought. however, he was justified in referring to the evidence and the information which was collected by the Commissioners of Inquiry on the state of the poor in Ireland. He was aware that it had been objected that the Commissioners of Inquiry had been mistaken in many of their calculations, and that the amount of destitution had been stated to be ex aggerated ; but it was very certain that the distress which existed was most extensive, and imperatively called for relief. The poor in Ireland were without raiment ; they lived in hovels that were totally unfit for any human being to breathe in ; they were huddled together in crowds, and lay on the damp floor at night. Such was really the case of the poor in Ireland, and he should like to know what degree of human suffering further than that was required before it was thought expedient to give relief ? He thought if relief ever was necessary, the poor of Ireland required it.—( Hear, hear, hear.) There ware near two millions of human beings there in this state of abject misery. The present Bill, in his opinion, would not ope rate in the slightest degree upon the cause of destitu tion ; for it was not by shutting up 200,000 or 300,000 persons that any good could be effected, or the social condition of the Irish peasantry improved. This great evil existed amongst the peasantry of Ireland. The Irish peasant had at present no security for his miser able subsistence unless the occupation of some small plot of ground. Now the Bill held out no right to him to claim relief, or no prospect of enjoying it ;conseqeently no feeling of security was created that he who received this relief o ould continue to obtain it, as the administrator of the law had the power of refusing it, even if he had the means of granting it to the fullest extent it required. The struggle for land which now existed to such a fright ful extent in Ireland would still continue una bated, and it was to this cause that most of the crimes that were committed, and the insecurity of property which prevailed there were mainly owing. He would not occupy the time of the House by entering into state ments to prove that this was the fact, for it was already known to every one who was acquainted with the administration of tlie law in Ireland—it was a well-established fact, that there was scarcely a landed proprietor in Ireland who dared to make the slightest alteration whatever in the distribution of his property, without incurring the danger of raising an insurrection in the country around him. It did appear to him that the time was come when they could no longer delay taking some decisive and vigorous steps to battle with the difficul ties which surrounded this question. In his opinion the only course to pursue was at once to place the landed. proprietors ;n that position in which they would becom polled to find either employment or subsistence for the poor. There was one part of Mr. Nicholl's Report which he wished to read to the Housa, as it related to a part of the country with whi c h h e was intimate.—[The Honourable Member read an extract from the Report, which stated the wretched state of the people in the county of Donegal.] He contended that an efficient Poor-law would certainly be in the end a pecuniary advantage to the landlords in Ireland, although it would, no doubt, be attended with some pressure at first. Although he advo cated a Poor-law on the most extended scale, lie was con sinceti that auxiliary measures should accompany it. He would vote for the second reading of the Bill with the greatest reluctance, and only because he had no alternative. Mr. SHAW agreed with the Hon. Baronet that the right to relief ought to be given to the destitute poor in Ireland. But he did not agree with him that it should be given out of the public funds. _ _ Mr. O'CONNELL agreed with Honourable Mem hers that this was not to be treated as a party question. But he did not agree with them that the Irish Members were unanimous as to the necessity of a Poor-law for Ireland. He would not occupy the House at any length on that occasion, as he intended to move an amendment on the motion that the Bill he committed, to the effect that it should be committed that day six months or three months.--(Hear, hear, hear.) He was not opposed to a Poor-law which would give relicf to the sick, the wounded, or the aged ; or any measure which should be free from the permanent ill of tempting the labouring classes to augment their numbers by looking to the workhouse as an ultimate refuge. If he stood alone he would oppose the Bill.—( Hear, hear.) He was convinced that Ireland was too poor for a Poor-law, and there never was a poor country benefitted by aPoor-law. Nctvs hi:standing the distinction which had been drawn be tween poverty and destitution, by the sages who said there was more poverty in Ireland and less destitution than in England, it was impossible for him to explain, as he did not understand how so much poverty should exist without destitution. A hundred workhouses, in which 80,000 persons were to be boxed up and imprisoned for the benefit of their health and the improvement of their morals—bv the separation of the husband from the wife, and the parent from the child—this was wholly unfit for Ireland. Mr. Nicholls need not have gone to Bristol or Manchester to ascertain that the Irish were unwilling to take relief in workhouses. He (Mr. O'Connell) would not occupy the House by discussing the merits of the Bill on that occassion, as he intended to oppose the Bill on wing into the Committee. Mr. GIBSON rejoiced that there was at least one Irish topic upon which all sides of the House were agreed, and he regarded the present discussion as an omen of better days for his unhappy country. Before they proceeded, however, to legislate on a measure which was of such paramount importance as this, and which was pregnant with consequences of such a vital nature,! they ought to enquire if they had sufficient data to proceed upon. Ile denied that they had such data, and he impeached in particular the report of Mr. Nicholls. That gentleman had stated that the number of poor that would re quire relief in Ireland would be only eighty thousand. He could not believe it. From his experience of the state of the poor in Ireland, he believed that that was only a fraction of the number that would require relief. By another report that had been made, it appeared that there were at least 2,000,000 of poor in Ireland, and taking from that number the 80,000 that were to be provided for in workhouses, what was to become of the remainder ? He agreed with the Hon. Member for Dublin that no Poor law was calculated for the benefit of any country. fle should resist through every stage the introduction of any Poor-law tHE SUN, LONDON, Tr_t_lSDAi*, PI4titUAIIV groandcd upon such erroneous data as was found in Mr. Nicholl's report. Mr: J. °RATTAN thought that the Bill in its peineiplee Was one best adapted for the improvement of the condition of Ireland. His request on the present occasion to Ministers would be to keep the Bill as it with the eiceptioq Of the clause's relating to eibigratiem The introduction of the issue sUbjects of out-door relief and emigration in one Bill lie did not approve of, and thought that tbey.shodld not be iiiiited *tip. No machinery that could be devised Would be ablb to gibe effect to the eystete. Mr. P. SCROPE agreed in the sentiment that the Bill was one of a most I — ...portent character for Irelana,, and even p wore so than the Rattan Clethelie Relief the pending MUnieipal Corporations Bill ; or any other Bill affecting the interests of Ireland. He looked upon it as calculated to faise Ireland from the most miserable and degraded country to the Most opuleitt and prosperous on the rice or the glut:ie. To not allowing out-door edict' he objected. In conjunction with the Poor-law ; he trusted that the Government Woitld coneeet a system for employing the population in public works. Mr. HINDLEY did not agree with the [tight Ildn. Gene tlernan:the Recorder for Dublin in hie congratulation that this was nd party qiiestion: Ul6 thotiO - ht it wtiiild hive bben better if it had beets ; far he bttlieVed that if it were a party question the benches on either side would have been more thickly clothed.—( Cries of," Oh, oh, oh.") But, as it was not a party question., they both agreed on the side of oppreesion,— ( Ole oh.) As to the machinery of the Bill, he did not object to that, whether it related to the eine hundred eiforkhoeses or to those workhouse confined to the reception of 80,000 Individuals; but lie wondered how the Bill could be called a good Bill, or that it could be designated as a Bill for the more effectual relief of the poor of Ireland. One of its chief effects would be to stop the source which now relieved the poor, namely, that of private charity. They were also empowered to !Atte wa-rants for the apprehension of suspected persons, and the money which a person might have received an hone before to relieve his destitution might be taken from him, and employed to send him to the house of correction. And this was in tt Christian land. Had the Noble Lord the Secret try for Ireland a heart? Had he read those Scriptures which in culcated good will and charity ? If they persisted in that course; and made also Mr. Nicholl the Commissioner for the achninietration of the new Poor Laws in Iceland, who was also a Commissioner to the handeloom weavers, they might depend upon it they would produce a state of things to which those of Canada would be but as a very little affair: Lord CLEMENTB requested that the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department would, upon going into Committee, more particularly describe the nature of the powers to be given to the Commissioners: They were large tiottrefa, They had the power of settling the question of emigration, and of deciding under what circumstances emi gration was desirable ; they had also the power of the forma tion of unions; and of deciding upon the size of the unions. He did !lot object to these powers; but required that some principle should be laid down upon which this discretion should be exercised. He should like also to be informed whether the Bill was to collie into operation gradually, or whether its ope ration would commence simultaneously in all the proposed Unions. Mr. W. ROCHE thought the great difficulty would be to get over the practical part of the working of the Bill. If they were successful in that the Bill would prove to be one of almost unmixed good. Lord J. RUSSELL did rot concur in the opinions ex pressed by the Hon. Member (Mr. Ilindley) that because both sides of the House agreed they were therefore agreed on the side of oppression. The law as it now stood made va grancy an offence transportable for seven years, This pu nishment in consequence of its rigour had not been carried into operation, and they now proposed, as that punishment had been deemed too heavy, to draw the line, but in such a manner as nut to render the law inoperative, as it now was, from its severity. It was but just to relieve the destitute, and, according to the law of England, that relief was provided for, and it was the intention to put the proposed law for Ireland on the same footing. That law, he considered was founded on charity, and while destitution was relieved vagrancy was punished. If it were to be said generally—as had been too much said in the laws for the relief of the poor of England, passed in the last century—that every case should be relieved on claim, or at most on imperfect inquiry, then a mass of simulated destitution would be produced, in addition to that which really existed, and thousands of persons would be found would rather take the idle means of existence afforded them by such a system than have recourse to labour or honest industry ; in proof of which fact he would only re fer to a letter which appeared in the public papers a few days past, signed " A Mai ket Gardener." The writer of that let ter, after cautioning the public against those persons who went about begging under the name of "the poor frozen-out gar deners," stated that he and other entployers were not alone willing, but actually wished to employ these men, but that almost every one of them left their labour to live upon public charity the moment an opportunity was offered them of obtain ing anything from it. These kind of abuses arose in every country, and Ireland was not an exception to the general rule. Therefore, to establish a system of indiscriminate relief, with out establishing also a test for destitution, would take away the stimulus to honest industry, and make the poor entirely dependent upon the public.. Some test being, then, neces sary, the workhouse was deemed by him the best that could be taken ; and he (Lord John Russell) was glad that the Right Hon. Baronet on the other side had seen the case in the swine light. As for the question of his Noble Friend (Lord Cle ments) respecting the power of the CoMmissioners, he ( Lord John Russell) should endeavour to give him an answer when ho undertood it ; but he would say that much would have to be left to the discretion of these gentlemen. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday next. PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS AND FREEMEN. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Parliamentary Electors and Freeman Bill. Mr. H. HINDE, before the Bill went into that stage, had an amendment to move, by way of instruction to the Com mittee. It was, that the Bill as it then stood should be se parated, and divided into two Bills. The Hon. Gentleman then moved, " That it be an instruction to the Committee to divide the Bill into two Bills." Lord J. RUSSELL was decidedly of opinion that the Bill should be passed as it then stood. Colonel SIBTII 0 RP supported the amendment. He re gretted to see the Noble Lord who had passed the Reform Bill, and was such a friend to liberality in the extension of the franchise in one direction, threw every obstacle possible in its way in another.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) And he re gretted it the more, because on the former occasion to which the Noble Lord alluded he had cast aspersions of the foulest kind upon that most respectable body of men, the freemen. Sir A. DAL R YMPL E could not support the amend ment, for from his own experience, the Bill was absolutely necessary. Mr. PR A ED disagreed with the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last. There could be no possible reason for uniting the two subjects of the Bill. The Noble Lord might say it was a boon to the constituents, but the constituents wanted no boon ; there was no need of such nonsense. He should support toe amendment. The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took place. On our return we found Mr. MACLEAN on his legs, supporting the amendment. He (Mr. Maclean) was astonished that the Government should propose such a measure, because, if he had been rightly informed on a recent occasion orders had been sent from the Exchequer to all the collectors of taxes to remit none of them on any account whatever. And yet here they were giving encouragement to individuals not to pay up their taxes. As yet the House were quite in the dark as to the substantial merits of the question. It appeared to him ( Mr. Maclean) to be the first of a series of initiatory changes in the Reform Bill, which he hoped the Noble Lord would be called on to explain the grounds of before they were permitted to pass. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the Committee l5B For the Amendment Majority The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. On Clause I being put from the Chair, Mr. T. DUNCONIBE should propose an amendment, which was intended to act as a most summary repeal of the rate-paying Clause altogether. It was to insert in lines 16 and 17 of the Bill the words " except such as shall have become payable from him (the rate-payer) previously to the 11th day of October in the preceding year." That would set the question at a fair issue, and decide it on broad grounds. He was happy to believe that the principle of the repeal of the rate-paying Clause was gaining friends at every discus sion. In 1883, when the Gallant Member for Westminster brought it forward, only twenty-four voted in its favour. In 1834 it was supported by thirtyaseven. In 1836, when he (Mr. Duncombe) first moved its repeal, fifty-one supported the motion, and in 1837 seventy-three voted for the second reading. On that occasion the Tories, fearing that the Whigs, if left to the mercies of the Radicals, would be beaten, went over, joined the former, and turned the scale by a majority of elLven.—( Laughter.) He was sorry to hear an Honourable Member say that they were only disreputable persons who did not pay their taxes. The facts were far otherwise. In the parish of St. George, Hanover-square, 5,144 persons resided liable to pay rates and capable of voting, yet only twenty-four persons had voted from that parish. From the passing of the Reform Bill every unconstitutional measure had been resorted to crush the liberal interests in boroughs, notwithstanding Lord John Russell's express declaration that, according to the Constitution, no taxes ought to be imposed on any man except through his representative. He c l a i me d t h e same pr i v il ege for the electors in boroughs as for the 501. electors in counties ) were not liable to the land-tax.—( Cheers. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the main object of the Re form Bill had been to secure the strict payment of taxes as a passport to the possession of the elective franchise ; but now the Honourable Member proposed to extend that franchise to those who paid no taxes—a totally different principle from that intended by the Reform Bill. If he admitted this amendment, it would go to alter the ancient spirit of the Constitution, and establish the principle that insolvency and beggary were as sufficient qualifications for voting as independence and in dustry. Mr. WARBURTON reminded the House that the old scot and lot system of rate-paying was one of the most fruitful sources of bribery and corruption, and that the tax-gatherer's attendance at the hustings; afforded no security, for he had been found ready to swear that the electors had paid their taxes, 4) hope of remuneration from the Candidate. The amendment of the law by the Noble Lord was good, but it did not go far enough till it reconciled this anomaly. Mr. CLAY would support the amendment of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, and if that failed, then that of the Noble Lord. Colonel EVANS said that the thanks of the people were due to the Noble Lord for his exertions on this point, on v;h:cli he (Colonel Evans) felt a deep interest, having betin the first to bring it forward in the House ; but he also felt that the ,Iriaenditient of the lion. Member for Finsbury deserved his stipPori. Mr; HUME said that under the scot and lot qgieth Ynly the, parish ratel were paid; the King's taxes had been super ilm Refoirti Hear; hear. ,) Nothing ; how ever,. of 'unity of election was gained Tay the predaution. itt MI. Leaders litte election elaen elediors came, and said readv to itiite for him if the t;otnmittee would pay their taxes— ( [fear, hear)—but the tioittinitte,e deeliriedi and then (he had reason to think) they went to ofter their services t:) the other sid v .—(A, The Noble Lord had raid that he eOuid no t tlltartktres fromthe spin, c . )f lieform but one of its provisions was that flick shaft!t! he. no constituency of less than three hundred electors. Now, there were actually flay such constituencies in the ki;tgdom, and they would he likely to contiritie if the Noble Lord did not accei:t the amendment of the Honourable Mettiber for Fins bury, and thus remo+ec all discrepancies in the §pitit or the Reform 80. • Lot•J J. RUSSELL acknowledged that the assessed taxes were sided to the parochial, for attaining greater ce,sirity in the qualification of electors, lie was astonished at the at - ,ee. (kite told by the Hon; Meniber respecting the applicants to Mr. Leader's tlectiBn COniiiiittee; for they must haski been prepared for the 6th of July in the pfcVions April, and their names must have been on the Registry to l'ovenifier to have enahled them to appear as voters at the time it wohld have been available for Mr. Leader. He was glad the Hon. Member for Kilkenny was not soft enough to be imposed upon by the eleven.—( A laugh.) The Hon. Members for I3ridport and Finsbury had argued that it was a hardship for the voters in borooghs to be called on to pay King's taxes, while the fifty-pound tenants in counties were exempt; and he really thought that the house of Commons in pasiog that measure ought to hove arranged that the latter should have paid these ta?les res): The lion. Member fur Killienny was much more answerable for this than himself; for he had voted for the exemption, and it so happened that none of the Go vernment did.—(Laughter.) Ile thought the lion, Member for Bridport was mistaken respecting the discrepancies in the election law of Scotland and England. There were no poor -rates in the former to pay, but the assessed taxes were to be paid.—( Here the Noble Lord read a extract from the Scottish Act to that effect.) Mr. WARBUItTON—There is no annual registration. Mr. GILLON said his Honourable friend was right— there were payments of assessed tales and registration of a voter, but there was no renewal of the latter; and a per son once placed on the registry remained on it whether he con tinued to pay his annual taxes or not—( Hear, hear)—for it had been decided that a failure to pay his taxes did not in validate his Mr. BA INES apprOved of the principle of the Bill, but he contended that its operation ought to be extended. By the Bill as it at present stood, the extension of the time for the payment of rates and taxes, applied only to persons whose n meg were already upon the register of the past year, and not to those who claimed in virtue of their occupancy to have their names inserted upon the register for the that time. This was a distinction unknown to the Reform Act, and he hoped the Noble Lord would extend the time for the payment to the 1I th of October in the preceding year, as well as to those names which were not in the former register to those that were inserted in that register. He might mention, to show the importance of this alteration, that in the borough which he had the honour to represent there were upwards of a thou sand names claiming to be registered in the last Revising Bar risters' Court, not one of whom could have availed himself of the benefit of this Bill if it had then been passed into a law. Nothing could be more detrimentil to the Reform Act than to grant the privileges under it partially or parsimoniously. Sir S. WHA L LEY hoped the Noble Lord would allow the people the full benefit of the spirit in which the Reform Act was framed. Mr. PRA ED said, the lion. Member for Finsbury had imputed to him a sweeping assertion that only disreputable people did not pay the King's taxes; but be had said no such thing. He did indeed say that, as a general rule, the payment of just and fair debts was a fair test of respectability, and he thought that any systematic evasion thereof was deci sive of the contrary. Mr. HALL should support the motion, as he thought it would be beneficial to all classes of voters. Mr. JARVIS said the present Bill was a truckling policy on the part of the Government, and was sure to be thrown out by the House of Lords. Mr. LEADER should support the amendment of the Hon. Member for Finsbury After a few words from Viscount Ebrington, Colonel Sib thorpe, and Mr. C. Buller, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the amendment of the Hon. Member for Finsbury went too far, as it went to qualify persons to Tote not only who had neglected but those who were unable to pay their rates. Sir E. Si:lG D E N felt some surprise at this measure being brought for Ward by the Noble Lord, and supported by some of the Hon. Members opposite, because he thought the Noble Lord had, on former occasions, said that he looked upon the Reform Bill as a final measure, and that they were not to have a revolution every year.—( Cheers.) Lord Althorp withdrew the 101. clause from the Reform Bill, on his suggestion. One object of the present Bill was to bring about changes in the Reform Bill by little and little. It would ultimately lead to what the Hon. Member for Finsbury wished to accomplish by his amendment. He would sooner vote for the amendment titan for the original clause. Lord J. RUSSELL was glad to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, who had night after night declaimed against the Reform Bill, as a revolutionary measure, now come down and say, " Let well alone." He now made war, not against the Reform Bill, but to support it. If the Reform Bill was a Bill of such mischief as the Hon. Members oppo site predicted, they should rather ask to repeal it than pre serve it as it was. He never had maintained that changes might not become necessary in the Reform Bill, and he should be always ready to make partial corrections in it, with the view to preserve and make it perfect. He could not, however, agree in the alteration proposed by the Hon. Member for Leeds—from the time that a voter got his name upon the re gister he would have the benefit of the extension of time for paying the rates and taxes. _ _ After a few words in explanation from Mr. C. BULLER and Lord J. RUSSELL, Mr. O'CONELL said it was a curious specimen of con servatism to recommend the support of a bad law, which Hon. Gentlemen opposite formerly so vehemently protested against. Sir E. SUGDEN had said nothing of a bad law. He had only spoken of obeying a law, a thing which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not, perhaps, understand. Mr. O'CONNELL said the Right Hon. Gentlemand had lost his temper.—( Cries of " No, no.") Sir E. SUGDEN said he was in the most perfect good humour.—( A laugh.) Mr. O'CONNELL—Then the Right lion. Gentleman knew how to say an uncivil thing in a good humour. The gallery was then cleared for a division, ►wen the num bers were— For the motion Against it Majority —99 _ _ On our return t) the gallery we found Mr. BAINES upon his legs, proposing an amendment, to the effect that one year's payment of taxes should be a suffi cient qualification far voters. At the suggestion of Lord J. RUSSELL the amendment was, however, withdrawn. O❑ the question that the clause stand part of the Bill being put, . - Mr. NIACLE AN expressed his determination to tnke the sense of the House upon it, as he considered it objectionable. The Gallery was then cleared for a division, when there appeared-- For the clause 214 Against it Majority _96 On our re-admission, we found - • Mr. JERV Ls, after a few words, proposing, as an amend ment to the clause, the insertion of the following words : " That no sum of money should be taken for the registration of any voter." Mi. BERNAL suggested that such an amendment would not be applicable to the Bill, which merely referred to the time at vs hick rates and taxes should be paid. After a few words from Lord Granville Somerset, Mr. Praed, Mr. Goulburn, Lord J. Russell, and Mr. Jervis, The clause was agreed to, as was also the preamble, after having been verbally amended. The House then resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be reported. THE COAL TRADE. the coal trade teas 661/,.l.9eted in the port of London. It Will not his inteiition that they should ear7y their inquiry further, o 5 g.) in ) the coal trade as it existed in the north ; and in mar , ' that they should confine therriseireS to this branch of the sUIP ject merely, he should propose that their investigation should Le limited to the regulations of the coal trade in London, rind the amount of duties chargeable on coals brought into marlc , e . the metropolis. In these inquiries they would find colts? , derable assistance in the report of the Committee of I e2(i , Though they did not want to make any material alterations with respect either to the amount of the duties or the way is which the coal trade was carried on, he was anxious that the matter should be fully examined into, in the hope that a satin' factory result to all parties would be arrived at. The lion• meni :2cr then moved that the House should resolve itself into Cab tfY4, Lord G. gOMBIISET of the north were not the only infg r pAtil,.. p, ::1 the interests of the cordovvneri He cUsipproved of invidious distinctions, wou ld be regardect,, 1s the system et combination in this trod,'existed as much nOWover hn tlioul, - ;ht that the whole subject, without reference td alit P nry of the country, should he inquired into, Th , , I-Luse then resclvcd itself into a Committee of the whole House. Mr. LABOUC tIERE, on bringing forward the motion of which he had given notice, for the House resolving itself into a Committee on the coal trade, said that the object he had in view was the continuance of the Bill which Mr. Fiankland Lewis brought in a few years ago for regulating the coal trade, as respected this metropolis and certain parts of the adjoining counties. That Bill, as the House must recollect, made an alteration, by which instead of being sold by men sureecoals should be only sold by weight, the dues being re gulated by the same principle. The operation of Mr. Frank land Lewis's Bill was limited to seven years, and as that time had nearly e xpired it became ne cessary to continue its provi _ ,i ons , If it were allowed to expire the consequence would be a return to the old system. The whole arrange ments with respect to coal metres would be done away with, and the vexatious imposts and dues of the city 0f L on d o n would all be revived. There could, he thought, be no difference of opinion as to the impro priety of allowing this Bill to expire, but at the same time he begged to say that it was not his intention to propose its renewal without allowing the House a full opportunity of looking into it, and closely and accurately investigating every one of its provisions. It appeared to him that the proper course uould be to refer the Bill on the second reading to a select Committee up stairs. It provisions would by this means be best examined and considered, and, with this impression on his mind, that was the course he meant t o take. He had communicated with the parties interested in the subject, both in the North and in London, and they all expressed themselves perftctly satisfied with what he proposed to do. There was one point which he was bound to mention, and it was one . Which be was sure would give satisfaction to the House, and that was, that when the corporation of the City of London ap plied to him to move for the renewal of this Bill they stated that they would consent to have the duty now levied by them on each ton of coals reduced one half. " The sum thus to be given up to the public would be about 6,0001. a year, and showed the disposition of the City of London to do everything in their power to contribute to the comfort and welfare of the inha bitants of the metropolis. He should propose that the select Committee should have power to inquire whether the duty of 12d. the chaldron, at present paid, could not be still further reduced, and also to investigate generally the manner in which Mr. LABO UCHE RE then proposed a resolution to the eff'et that et Bill should be braught in for continuing the law no,v in operatiop with respect to the coal trade of the ine tropoll;, Mr. GOtibIllURN feared that the object which the llon• gentleman had iri t3si4 would not be attained by his resolu tion, s. it went merely to the Pentinuanee of the present Act, and not to the inquiry proposed. Mr. LABOUCHERE meant to effect the inquiry by means of an instruction to the Committee. With respect t!" what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Lord O. I!4onterset):i he had merely to explain that his r ea s o n f o r mentioniw' th co - downers -, of the north was, because it was on them 1•17' true,, trop olis depended for a supply of that article. lie was •ort . „? to say that little or no coals reached the port of London from any other quarter. The resolution having been agreed to, arid the House bal ing resumed, leave was given to bring the Bill in, and it was subsequently brought in mid read a first time, and ordered for the second reading, as we believe, on Thursday next. In answer to a question from Colonel SIBTHORP, Lord J. RUSSELL :It'd it was the intention of the 6°' vernment to proceed with the Parliamentary Electors Bill OP' Monday or Friday se'nnight. Mr. JERVIS gave notice that on the re-committal o f the Bill he would press the insertion of his clause. The Court of Sessions (Scotland) Bill arid the Shcrif 4 Courts (Scotland) Bill, respectively, on the motion of tho LORD ADVOCATE, passed through a Committee. To be printed with the omitted clauses, and re-committed. Mr. WARBURTON moved the second reading of the Qualifications of Members Bill. Colonel SIBTHORP would not resist the motion, though he was satisfied the Bill never would succeed. Mr. PRAED would not oppose the Bill, but he could lo t help thinking that, instead of preventing fictitious qualifica tions, it would have the contrary effect. At present the qua: lification was required to be real, but this measure would rend e r it pertlonal, This was only an attempt to nibble away the ae" cessity or qualification altogether, and therefore he rnikst pre' test against it. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to b d committed on Thursday. Viscount PALMERSTON laid on the table some par which had been ordered. The other Orders of the Day having been disposed of, t he House adjourned, at a Quarter to Twelve o'Clock, HOUSE OF LORDS, FRB. 5. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the We ei ' sack at five minutes past Five o'clock. Lord DENNIAN presented two petitions from CI : " ventry, praying for a general system of national education ; and that by that system no preference might be g iven t° any particular sect. htit Lord GLENELG l a id on th e t a bl e cer t a i n pellets, - his Lordship made no observation thereon. fel Lord RIPON wished to know wh e the r it wa s in te e contemplation of her Majesty's Government to grante we understood, a charter f o r th e p ur p ose o f co l on izing 1%4e Zealand ? Lord GLENELG wished to have till to-morroW t° answer the question. AFFAIRS OF CANADA. Upon the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, the Ord er r of the Day was read for hearing Mr. Roebuck at the D 6 on the affairs of Canada. [The House of Lords this evening presented a v ery' mated and novel appearance. Immediately Mr. Roebuck v ?, ordered to be called in, severa l P eers l e f t th e i r usua l se e n', and stationed themselves on th e b enc h es nea r the P ° e ; among whom we observed, Lord Lyndhu rs t, L o rd Ll‘ c ' te the Earl of Radnor, the Duke of W e lling t° r e the Marquis of Salisbury, the Earl of Aberdeen, and Wharncliffe. Lord Melbourne appeared to pay great at te tion to the speech of the Learned Gentleman, o f which he t°° r e voluminous notes. Lord Glenelg s a t next to the 1-4° , 5 Chancellor at the table. The space b e l ow the Bar W fr , c:oeeled. Mr. Leader, Sir Willi am Molesworth, the Wakley, Mr. Hume, and several o th e r M em bers take an interest in Canadian affairs, were p e eeeu t t" whole of the evening.] Mr. Roebuck was then called in. He said—My Lords' I appear before your Lordships as an advocate for the Pu'r,i pose of laying before your Lordships such statements , 00 1 , such arguments thereon, as, I believe, will induce your 1-I f ie ships not to allow to pas s i n t o a l aw a Bill w hi c h is noW '' er upon your Lordships' t a bl e f or th e b e tt er governmen t of L° w __, Canada. My LordS, this is a Bill of Pains and Penaltie s er s penalties to be i n fli c t e d on m y c li en t s i n consequen ce ni tain supposed mi s d ee d s o f th e i rs , w hi c h m i s d ee d s they bas e performed to th e f u ll an d p er f ec t concurrence of the only masters to whom they can possibly aPP! 3 ' t ., namely, their constitusnts. My L or d s , m y el' er e . on this occasion, are the Assembly of Lower irg nada ; and, in consequence of ce rt a i n con d uc t of O le o , approved of by the unanimous voice of their constitne;s your Lordships arc called upon to punish them, by redne l bo them from freemen, who had authority pos sesse d frow'r,, privilege of a free Government, to be in a con di t i o n of S C. it My Lords, I am here to show that th e asser ti o ns Wh i m have been made respecting the Assembly of Lower Cat' 4 3)l are utterly false and without foundation, and that that he in ell their proceedings have been firm, wise, Prudent, 1, forbearing ; and that if on an y h an d t h ere h ave b ee n 'fa ci e, lation, deceit, hypocrisy, p e t u l ance, an d ill- conce i ve d, Ill'' a Bested measures of Government, infinitely worse ear r , s le „t into execution, they are not the parties to blame , that the culp i it s are nearer at hand, my L °l. t - i s s t and that you r L or d s hi ps nee d not go out of toe, to fi n d su bj ects f or your an i ma dverst a to But I still advance one step further. I will point 0 0 t your Lordships simply what the inj us ti ce o f this 1 301 , 1 1 ,: which in justice I shall prove by f a l s ifyi n g the tu be gations th a t h ave b een ma d e aga i nst my c li e nts, i t Assembly of L ower C ana d a . —( H ear , h ear .) I ;B its prove the impolicy o f thi s measure —l s h a ll prove uee injuitice, my Lords, by taking one after a note 5 , the assertions th a t h ave b een ma d e res p ec ti n g the sembly of Lower Canada, and showing them to be wit h ° lo , found a ti on one a ft er ano th er ; an d I s h a ll s h ow time I,it policy of this measure t o your Lordships, by pointing ° it , the fated consequences that will necessarily result front, I will not content myself with proving that the tendene ) t ° o this measure is most dangerous, but I shall demonstra te , your Lordship s that it i s wan t on m i sc hi e f . I sha ll dery ° ° f strate to you that ther e e xi s t means o f ma ki ng t h e pe ore °, Canada subjects to y ou by th e i r h earts, an d not on l y tot ste cure the present pe ace o f y our A mer i can possess i ons , bu fy provide for the f u t ure secur i ty o f G reat Britain. A n. E r Lords, the fi rA t p or ti on o f argument w hi c h I have to e ' will relate to the injustice of the proposed tnfasure , v o f before I can prove that injustice, I must know t ee what my clients are accused. But amidst all , e 0 farrago of calumnie s whi c h a r e a ll ege d aga i ns t them, I find nothing but assertion without proof, declamation sr" out foundation, and calumny without guilt. Those ass e e e tions have taken every possible shape ; they have appea r to in pamphlets, poems, and speeches, aye, even speeches P ry the Ministers of the Crown. The calumny has taken e ve 5 , shape, but calumny it still is, as I shall s h ow your Lordsbirie My Lords, there are three propo s iti ons w hich d o not lie 0 in the vague generalities of debate, and with which 1- e3 O ( grapple: The- first of th ese i s th a t t h e A sse mblY Lower Canada have improperly and unwarran tably (_ mended an Elective Le g islative Cou nc il, an d that tb e e stopped the supplies in consequence of that denu i 4 not having been acceded to : next, th a t th e Assen t ' i t e is connected with the revolt which has broken ° I, in Lower Canada ; and, thirdly, th a t t h e pecu li ar dO etl e f ties arising from the differences of race in the population that country require the Bill now • before your Lordships 5 Now, my Lords, I will prove every one of these aeserti°°e to be false. My Lords, I assert boldly that the conduc t the Assembly in demanding an Elective Legislative Cole and stopping the Suppli e s as they have justified donefor two years , ° was by the Constitution which you yourselves 0; t them. That s o f ar f rom d emand i ng pun i shment, i t ong''. rather to extort your admiration, and, if anything-, your 0; tation also. M y L or d s, I w i ll prove that the Assembly. is 110 connected with the revolt which has broken out in the Ca n ` des, and w hi c h h as b een suppressed by means disgracefule to our nati ona l c h aracter — wh i ch if it now is smou lden°;" it is under the terrors of a disgraceful butchery and ia eer , diarism which would disgrace the worst annals of the m ost l' a , r t : barous nations. My Lords, I don't stand here tojustify reval t I stand here to justify the Assembly, and I will show ti l e ° , their conduct has been perfectly correct and justifiable by the treatment which they have received. I will show r e your Lordship s t h a t t h e i r conduct arose from t.ae deceit, vac illation--from the II) pocricy and cowardl e " of the Ministers of the Crown. Furtherm ore :, I will show y our L or d s hi ps t h at the Bill which is no's before your Lordships is unfounded in justice, that it the mere pretext of parties who have sinister interests i° this matter, and who are endeavouring to a ppeal to ()o worst p ass i ons f or th e worst an d most base ° f purpos es —th e i r own pr i vate an d pecun i ary sat i s f ac tion.' (Hear, h ear .) M y L or d s , i n def en di ng t h e Assembly"